Your browser does not support iframes. For maximum efficiency, please upgrade to your browser's latest version or use an iframe compatible browser such as Internet Explorer, Netscape, Opera, Mozilla, Firefox, Bezilla, Galleon, WarpZilla or Lynx.

Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: $6,000.00| Rating: 9

Pros:

+superb image quality

Cons:

heavy weight, monopad highly recommended,

As I am wedding photographer (https://www.photoproject.ch) I am always looking for special lenses. This is a very special one. The image quality is simply perfect. The cons is the really heavy weight. Sometimes too much so that I don't use that lenses very often! But if I have a assistant I often use this lens.
The building quailty is exceptional high.

mrcontinental

Registered: December 2010Posts: 7

Nikon 200mm f/2G ED-IF AF-S VR Nikkor review by mrcontinental

Review Date: 11/9/2011

Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: $4,200.00| Rating: 10

Pros:

A sports and paparazzi must have, hand holdable with VR with ease

Cons:

You better eat your Wheaties

Words cannot describe the incredible sharpness this lens is capable of. Even goofing around you will accidentally get a real keeper. I've done excellent portfolio work for aspiring young models with this and the 300 f2.8 VR. In door sports is a dream with this on a D3s, you can almost shoot in the dark. Still works well with the TC 17eII for increased versatility. You gotta pay to play!

jake

Registered: August 2009Posts: 8

Nikon 200mm f/2G ED-IF AF-S VR Nikkor review by jake

Review Date: 8/9/2009

Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 10

Pros:

Cons:

absolutly the best lens, excelent image quality

HMFRiverdale

Registered: July 2008Posts: 1

Nikon 200mm f/2G ED-IF AF-S VR Nikkor review by HMFRiverdale

Review Date: 7/31/2008

Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: $3,900.00| Rating: 10

Pros:

There is not a single negative in this lens. Not one.

Cons:

Weighs a ton. . . better do your push-ups.

This is simply the best lens I have ever used. If you are shooting indoor sports, in low-light gyms, you need to find a way to obtain this lens.

I used this lens paired with my D2Hs and it was unbelievable, and I could have lived shooting with that combination forever. . . and then in February I purchased a D3. . . oh, my. This is the greatest sports shooting combination I can imagine.

I also have a 70-200 and sadly, I never use it. I made the mistake of getting the 200. . . mistake only in the sense that my need for the 70-200 is little to none.

If you can afford it, you can buy no better lens on the planet to take indoor sports shots.

lextalionis

Registered: October 2007Posts: 82

Nikon 200mm f/2G ED-IF AF-S VR Nikkor review by lextalionis

Review Date: 2/25/2008

Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: $3,950.00| Rating: 10

Pros:

Amazingly FAST! And sharp even wide-open, but perfect sharp just stopped down one stop!

Cons:

It's heavy, but stop being a whimp!

If you are into professional people photography and want good results, then look no further then this lens.

Arolfe's review is absolutely spot on for this stunning lens. And...this is also my absolutely favourite lens. I will add a few additional points:

1. Performance with teleconverters: I'm not normally a fan (at all) of teleconverters. That being said, this lens provides stellar performance when paired with Nikon's TC-14EII (1.4x) teleconverter; very good performance with Nikon's TC-17EII (1.7x) teleconverter; and even very acceptable performance with the TC-20E (2x). I actually prefer the performance of this lens with the TC-14EII teleconverter to that of the 300 mm f2.8 VR, even when shot wide open (really!).

2. The autofocus speed of this lens is phenomenal. It focuses faster than any telephoto lens I have ever tested, period.

This lens defines sharpness. However, I would suggest that anyone considering purchasing it test it first. It IS very bulky and very heavy - it will take a determined and disciplined photographer to get the most out of this lens simply because its weight and size makes it easy to leave behind...

Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: $5,150.00| Rating: 10

Pros:

Sharp beyond belief, wonderful bokeh

Cons:

weight, price

About two years ago I made a big mistake: I wanted to buy a 70-200 lens and took my camera along to a trade show to compare the two obvious contenders; Nikkor or Sigma (half the price but no VR). I took a load of shots and went home to compare them on screen.

When I got home and reviewed the images, the Nikkor 70-200 beat the Sigma hands down, so I obviously went out and bought the Nikkor and have been happy ever since... except... no: I did buy the lens, but I have never been completely happy with it.

While I was at the Nikon booth I had also played with some other lenses - including the 200/2 - of course I didn't want to buy one - way too big, heavy and expensive - but it would be fun to play. And then I saw the images on the computer. Oh dear.

The Nikkor 70-200 is legendary for its exceptional performance, and it is good; but if the 70-200 scores a 10, then using the same scale the 200/2 would rate at least15. Everything about it is superlative. It is sharper wide open at f/2.0 than the 70-200 is stopped down to f/5.6. Amazingly, sharpness increases slightly, peaking at about 2.8-4, but frankly what is the point of buying an f/2.0 lens and stopping it down? And it's not just sharpness - the 85/1.4 has a good reputation for creamy bokeh - but it is merely adequate next to the 200/2. The transition from sharp focus to creamy blur is also handled beautifully. Contrast is amazing, colours dazzling. If you have enough room it is a fantastic portrait lens, and in gloomy weather it is great for touchline shooting at sports. I shot a couple of rugby matches just before Christmas, one with the 200/2 and one with the 200-400. Now the 200-400 is a stellar lens, but the extra 2 stops of the 200/2 resulted in a much higher hit rate - although it was only practicable as the D2x has enough resolution to allow quite heavy cropping.

Is there a moral? Yes - if you can't afford it, don't try it. I did and it haunted me and taunted me. I would have been happy in my ignorance with my new 70-200, but I just couldn’t enjoy it fully knowing what I was missing. I held out for just over a year, but I gave in and bought it last March. Using it is a pure joy - focussing speed is so fast you would swear it is psychic. I’m not being critical of the 70-200, I’m only using it as a comparator as it is a very good lens, but the focussing speed of the zoom is positively pedestrian in comparison.

Any downsides? Apart from being a bit pricey, a monopod is virtually mandatory - handholding is easy, but should be an Olympic endurance event. The VR (which works very well, incidentally) is shifting some large bits of glass around and it drains the battery fairly quickly, so anything other than a D2 body could well have its battery drained before the memory card is full.